iv/linux
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
975c99a570
linux/fs/io-wq.h

59 lines
1.4 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

io-wq: small threadpool implementation for io_uring This adds support for io-wq, a smaller and specialized thread pool implementation. This is meant to replace workqueues for io_uring. Among the reasons for this addition are: - We can assign memory context smarter and more persistently if we manage the life time of threads. - We can drop various work-arounds we have in io_uring, like the async_list. - We can implement hashed work insertion, to manage concurrency of buffered writes without needing a) an extra workqueue, or b) needlessly making the concurrency of said workqueue very low which hurts performance of multiple buffered file writers. - We can implement cancel through signals, for cancelling interruptible work like read/write (or send/recv) to/from sockets. - We need the above cancel for being able to assign and use file tables from a process. - We can implement a more thorough cancel operation in general. - We need it to move towards a syslet/threadlet model for even faster async execution. For that we need to take ownership of the used threads. This list is just off the top of my head. Performance should be the same, or better, at least that's what I've seen in my testing. io-wq supports basic NUMA functionality, setting up a pool per node. io-wq hooks up to the scheduler schedule in/out just like workqueue and uses that to drive the need for more/less workers. Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
2019-10-22 19:25:58 +03:00
#ifndef INTERNAL_IO_WQ_H
#define INTERNAL_IO_WQ_H
struct io_wq;
enum {
IO_WQ_WORK_CANCEL = 1,
IO_WQ_WORK_HAS_MM = 2,
IO_WQ_WORK_HASHED = 4,
IO_WQ_WORK_NEEDS_USER = 8,
io_uring: io_uring: add support for async work inheriting files This is in preparation for adding opcodes that need to add new files in a process file table, system calls like open(2) or accept4(2). If an opcode needs this, it must set IO_WQ_WORK_NEEDS_FILES in the work item. If work that needs to get punted to async context have this set, the async worker will assume the original task file table before executing the work. Note that opcodes that need access to the current files of an application cannot be done through IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL. Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
2019-10-24 21:39:47 +03:00
IO_WQ_WORK_NEEDS_FILES = 16,
io-wq: small threadpool implementation for io_uring This adds support for io-wq, a smaller and specialized thread pool implementation. This is meant to replace workqueues for io_uring. Among the reasons for this addition are: - We can assign memory context smarter and more persistently if we manage the life time of threads. - We can drop various work-arounds we have in io_uring, like the async_list. - We can implement hashed work insertion, to manage concurrency of buffered writes without needing a) an extra workqueue, or b) needlessly making the concurrency of said workqueue very low which hurts performance of multiple buffered file writers. - We can implement cancel through signals, for cancelling interruptible work like read/write (or send/recv) to/from sockets. - We need the above cancel for being able to assign and use file tables from a process. - We can implement a more thorough cancel operation in general. - We need it to move towards a syslet/threadlet model for even faster async execution. For that we need to take ownership of the used threads. This list is just off the top of my head. Performance should be the same, or better, at least that's what I've seen in my testing. io-wq supports basic NUMA functionality, setting up a pool per node. io-wq hooks up to the scheduler schedule in/out just like workqueue and uses that to drive the need for more/less workers. Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
2019-10-22 19:25:58 +03:00
IO_WQ_HASH_SHIFT = 24, /* upper 8 bits are used for hash key */
};
enum io_wq_cancel {
IO_WQ_CANCEL_OK, /* cancelled before started */
IO_WQ_CANCEL_RUNNING, /* found, running, and attempted cancelled */
IO_WQ_CANCEL_NOTFOUND, /* work not found */
};
struct io_wq_work {
struct list_head list;
void (*func)(struct io_wq_work **);
unsigned flags;
io_uring: io_uring: add support for async work inheriting files This is in preparation for adding opcodes that need to add new files in a process file table, system calls like open(2) or accept4(2). If an opcode needs this, it must set IO_WQ_WORK_NEEDS_FILES in the work item. If work that needs to get punted to async context have this set, the async worker will assume the original task file table before executing the work. Note that opcodes that need access to the current files of an application cannot be done through IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL. Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
2019-10-24 21:39:47 +03:00
struct files_struct *files;
io-wq: small threadpool implementation for io_uring This adds support for io-wq, a smaller and specialized thread pool implementation. This is meant to replace workqueues for io_uring. Among the reasons for this addition are: - We can assign memory context smarter and more persistently if we manage the life time of threads. - We can drop various work-arounds we have in io_uring, like the async_list. - We can implement hashed work insertion, to manage concurrency of buffered writes without needing a) an extra workqueue, or b) needlessly making the concurrency of said workqueue very low which hurts performance of multiple buffered file writers. - We can implement cancel through signals, for cancelling interruptible work like read/write (or send/recv) to/from sockets. - We need the above cancel for being able to assign and use file tables from a process. - We can implement a more thorough cancel operation in general. - We need it to move towards a syslet/threadlet model for even faster async execution. For that we need to take ownership of the used threads. This list is just off the top of my head. Performance should be the same, or better, at least that's what I've seen in my testing. io-wq supports basic NUMA functionality, setting up a pool per node. io-wq hooks up to the scheduler schedule in/out just like workqueue and uses that to drive the need for more/less workers. Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
2019-10-22 19:25:58 +03:00
};
#define INIT_IO_WORK(work, _func) \
do { \
(work)->func = _func; \
(work)->flags = 0; \
io_uring: io_uring: add support for async work inheriting files This is in preparation for adding opcodes that need to add new files in a process file table, system calls like open(2) or accept4(2). If an opcode needs this, it must set IO_WQ_WORK_NEEDS_FILES in the work item. If work that needs to get punted to async context have this set, the async worker will assume the original task file table before executing the work. Note that opcodes that need access to the current files of an application cannot be done through IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL. Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
2019-10-24 21:39:47 +03:00
(work)->files = NULL; \
io-wq: small threadpool implementation for io_uring This adds support for io-wq, a smaller and specialized thread pool implementation. This is meant to replace workqueues for io_uring. Among the reasons for this addition are: - We can assign memory context smarter and more persistently if we manage the life time of threads. - We can drop various work-arounds we have in io_uring, like the async_list. - We can implement hashed work insertion, to manage concurrency of buffered writes without needing a) an extra workqueue, or b) needlessly making the concurrency of said workqueue very low which hurts performance of multiple buffered file writers. - We can implement cancel through signals, for cancelling interruptible work like read/write (or send/recv) to/from sockets. - We need the above cancel for being able to assign and use file tables from a process. - We can implement a more thorough cancel operation in general. - We need it to move towards a syslet/threadlet model for even faster async execution. For that we need to take ownership of the used threads. This list is just off the top of my head. Performance should be the same, or better, at least that's what I've seen in my testing. io-wq supports basic NUMA functionality, setting up a pool per node. io-wq hooks up to the scheduler schedule in/out just like workqueue and uses that to drive the need for more/less workers. Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
2019-10-22 19:25:58 +03:00
} while (0) \
struct io_wq *io_wq_create(unsigned concurrency, struct mm_struct *mm);
void io_wq_destroy(struct io_wq *wq);
void io_wq_enqueue(struct io_wq *wq, struct io_wq_work *work);
void io_wq_enqueue_hashed(struct io_wq *wq, struct io_wq_work *work, void *val);
void io_wq_flush(struct io_wq *wq);
void io_wq_cancel_all(struct io_wq *wq);
enum io_wq_cancel io_wq_cancel_work(struct io_wq *wq, struct io_wq_work *cwork);
#if defined(CONFIG_IO_WQ)
extern void io_wq_worker_sleeping(struct task_struct *);
extern void io_wq_worker_running(struct task_struct *);
#else
static inline void io_wq_worker_sleeping(struct task_struct *tsk)
{
}
static inline void io_wq_worker_running(struct task_struct *tsk)
{
}
#endif
#endif
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink